On Sun, 21 Oct 2001, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote: > And as for whether always adding a charset is appropriate > or not -- that was decided, and not recently, as the answer > to the cross-site-scripting issue. We provide a means of > *always* specifying a charset, and the www.apache.org server > was doing so -- at least for a while. Now it is not.
well, for text/plain or text/html documents. Not for everything else. Sadly, it isn't enabled by default due to the below issue... > As for Draconianly specifying "; charset=iso-8859-1" on > anything that doesn't have one.. so specify something else > as the default, or whomever the 'lazy programer' is should > get off the glutei and explicitly associate the appropriate > charset with all the content-types for which the default is > not appropriate. But don't assume omitting it is a Good Thing, > *especially* for .html files, because it ain't. :-) well, unfortunately this is the age old problem of conflicts between metadata for a resource and the resource itself. All too often people can't set the right charset in the headers, so they have to do it in a meta tag in the body. And the meta tag in the body won't have an impact if there is one specified in the headers.
